@CaptainSword1
So I'm personally not concerned and I'll tell you why.
LCME comes every 8 years to re-accredit which is obviously a very necessary process to ensure adequate training and environment for students. With that said, medical education and it's workings are in a constant ebb and flow. I don't think there's any institution that operates at optimum capacity at all times in terms of LCME metrics. What were once the goals for improvement over one 8-yr cycle might completely change the following cycle. While trying to improve deficiencies from the previous cycle, I think it's reasonable to expect that other things may decline a bit when LCME comes back 8 years later.
Some areas that garnered an unsatisfactory rating were things like "sufficiency of buildings and equipment" and "comparability of education/assessment" between the different medical degree programs which were already being looked into prior to evaluation. It's not like admin is sitting on their hands despite what others will have you think and students still perform very well.
In terms of student mistreatment. I've never experienced it in the pre-clinical environment, haven't heard any horror stories, and can't yet speak to it in terms of clinicals. At any rate, I agree that this is concerning in a way and should be addressed accordingly. The point of a school is to house and be there for it's students. No one wants to pay to be mistreated unless you're into that kinda thing...
All in all, I'm agreeing that Miller needs to get it's act together on certain things but this knee-jerk reaction isn't necessary. I think it's also worth noting that all schools aren't reviewed on the same 8 year cycle so a school's results can be more pronounced a particular year. If I were betting man, I'd say "monitoring" and "unsatisfactory" ratings are relatively common after these things.
Not an expert in the accreditation process, just a student with $0.02. Hope it adds some clarity.
